Dagger2

24 ms·

481.
by Dagger2 4y ago
You don't need a fixed prefix to get most of the benefits of v6. DNS is a thing.
482.
by Dagger2 4y ago
Perhaps not by themselves, but every country that does this adds to the weight of the argument.
483.
by Dagger2 4y ago
CGNAT isn't imposed by governments, it's imposed by address space exhaustion in v4. v6 fixes it by having enough address space that NAT isn't needed. Governments share some responsibility here for not mandating a move to v6,
484.
by Dagger2 4y ago
I'm not sure it was ever relevant. All it does is describe the problem, which was already well-known at the time by the people working on v6. It doesn't give a fix for it. It doesn't give a fix because no fix is possible. Bec
485.
by Dagger2 4y ago
Maybe a jigsaw puzzle is the wrong analogy. Then again, you can place the pieces in a jigsaw puzzle down in any order, so perhaps it's not completely wrong? The analogy wasn't really the important part of my post.
486.
by Dagger2 4y ago
It's not silly -- the long term goal is to stop burning natural gas completely, and we can't do that unless we stop burning it.
487.
by Dagger2 4y ago
The long term goal is to not use gas at all. This is one necessary piece of that jigsaw puzzle.
488.
by Dagger2 4y ago
No such thing as a "NAT firewall"... and v6 was designed this way because nothing else really works. Almost all existing code that was written to handle v4 was written to handle addresses of exactly 32 bits, not addresses of arbit
489.
by Dagger2 4y ago
It is possible -- NAT won't protect you from inbound connections. Even using RFC1918 addresses on your LAN won't protect you from all inbound connections. You need a firewall for that. If you don't trust the ISP device to fir
490.
by Dagger2 4y ago
Routers don't "default" to one protocol or the other. They do both v4 and v6, and end devices pick which to use for each connection.
491.
by Dagger2 4y ago
That's the porn. There's a separate option to show/hide 18+ shows.
492.
by Dagger2 4y ago
That's just DNS requests, not traffic. You'd expect the number of A and AAAA requests to be about equal, because software simultaneously looks up both record types for each hostname in order to determine which protocols the hostna
493.
by Dagger2 4y ago
Looking up in the thread, I see "Another is the massive. underfunding of the NHS over the last decade" in the first post and things like "No, it isn't due to lack of funding, that's a lie" in the replies. That
494.
by Dagger2 4y ago
The problem is caused by the current in-power political party wanting to run the NHS into the ground so they can use the resulting bad performance to justify selling it off to their mates.
495.
by Dagger2 4y ago
Between how widespread it is, how easily it transmits and how likely it is to seriously mess you up, it's not really low risk. Even if it was low risk, it would still mean that the underlying risk of infectious diseases in our societ
496.
by Dagger2 4y ago
Dropped considerably? I'd say our risk tolerance has gone up , not down. On top of that, the underlying risk has gone up. This is not a good combination for our healthcare systems. They can't get out of the COVID-19 mindset, beca
497.
by Dagger2 4y ago
"Funded enough" would mean things like GP appointments in days rather than weeks, and specialized diagnosis/treatment in weeks rather than years. What percentage of GDP would be needed for that? That question would require a
498.
by Dagger2 4y ago
We were talking about the NHS being underfunded, and you said that funding has increased in absolute terms. Both of these things can be true simultaneously.
499.
by Dagger2 4y ago
It could act as an NBD server. The in-kernel client for that has been around since Linux 2.1.x.
500.
by Dagger2 4y ago
They implemented it; it landed in May: https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/commit/f375b23c
501.
by Dagger2 4y ago
It's not the case. Firewalling works the same in v6 as it does in v4, and most people will have a firewall on their router that prevents inbound connections from the Internet by default.
502.
by Dagger2 4y ago
So why did you ever pay any mind to them? The world isn't going to end just because v4 addresses are scarce (...and I don't think anybody was arguing that it would...), but that doesn't make the problems any less real, expens
503.
by Dagger2 4y ago
Decent satellite internet for people who can't get anything else? I don't see how 4G/5G home internet existing removes the point of it.
504.
by Dagger2 4y ago
It's 2001::0:8080 port 80. Require the brackets for specifying a port number with a v6 address, and don't accept a port without the brackets. That way there's no ambiguity.
505.
by Dagger2 4y ago
Quite hard, actually, since that's mostly what v6 already does and you can see how many things need to change to accommodate it. Most other parts of v6's design are the same as v4, so it's not really very complicated compared
506.
by Dagger2 4y ago
It sucks if you're non-technical too, it's just harder for non-technical users to figure out the underlying source of any problems they have. v6 also has better measured performance on webpage load times. Perhaps "pages load
507.
by Dagger2 4y ago
It only rotates the IP used for outbound connections; you still have a non-rotating IP you can use for inbound.
508.
by Dagger2 4y ago
It's not a privacy nightmare. You could just run a proxy on your gateway and your connections would legitimately end up coming from it, but it wouldn't actually do much for your privacy.
509.
by Dagger2 4y ago
It's not very over-engineered; most parts of it work the same as v4 does, just with bigger addresses. Writing the addresses in hex is because doing so is easier. It lines up with the binary better which makes subnetting easier, and do
510.
by Dagger2 4y ago
It's not even technically correct; it's just wrong. NAT doesn't make any choices on where a packet gets delivered. For packets that aren't part of an existing steam, NAT will simply not edit the packet. Unless there&#x27

More ›